•  
  •  
 

Academic Leadership: The Online Journal (2003-2012)

Mindy Salmans

Abstract

Two events specific to this study occurred in 1999, 1) the National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact became effective which provided reciprocity among the states to share records without charging each other for the information, and 2) all 50 states and the District of Columbia were finally members of the National Association of State Directors of Teacher Education and Certification (NASDTEC) Clearinghouse which collects information concerning the status of educational certificates and can then share (reciprocate) this information to any interested member of the NASDTEC Clearinghouse. The purpose of this study was to determine whether reciprocity among the 50 states and the District of Columbia had caused an increase in certificate sanctions such as revocation, suspension or denial. By 1999, many states were also including fingerprinting in their criminal history background checks, but some states still were not. There were concerns among some teachers, school districts, and states that the cost of fingerprinting was too great, the time constraints of such checks were too great and fingerprints infringed on ones privacy. A graduate wanting to receive a teaching certificate in both Kansas and Missouri would have to pay for and go through the fingerprinting process in both states, within days of each other. The fingerprinting process is not reciprocated; however, information received from the national criminal search as a result of the fingerprinting process is reciprocated.

Rights

© The Author(s)

Comments

For questions contact ScholarsRepository@fhsu.edu

Download

Share

COinS